By Joshua Colomar, iTPA Intern

Researchers often recommend a split step as a preparatory motion to enable quick movement for the next shot. Given that the majority of tennis strokes are hit under time pressure, it seems essential to provide the athlete with the best way to react and respond to these kind of situations. This post is focused on a 2014 research study by Nieminen and colleagues.

Nine healthy tennis players participated in a choice reaction test. The test consisted of reacting to a LED light stimulus and to move in that direction as fast as possible using the pivot step (moving out with the outside leg in the direction of the ball) as first step. Test was conducted with split step option and no split step option before the first step. Measurements taken during this test were: a) response time; b) force production time; c) total reaction time; d) horizontal and vertical mean forces; e) time to photocell. Apart from the measurements given from the choice test, other parameters were taken into account. Maximal Voluntary Contraction (MVC), Rate of Force Development (RFD), stretch-reflex and excitability of the motor neuron were registered. All these parameters would examine possible advantages of the split step over non-split step conditions and how force production capabilities, reflex sensibility and muscle activation patterns of leg muscles differ between situations.
We will divide results in two categories: time parameters and neuromuscular variables. Concerning time, in split step condition, response time, total reaction time and photocell time were significantly shorter (meaning faster) than with the no-split step condition. No differences were observed in the force production time. Observing the data available from the force plate we see that split step also produced greater vertical and horizontal peak and mean forces (more ground reaction forces). Neuromuscular variables highlighted that vertical and horizontal forces correlate negatively with the time from onset of force production to the photocell in the split step condition. Also forces correlated directly with the athlete’s RFD.

Split Step: Time registrations reveal that the split step was faster than no split step condition. This is related to timing of landing so players must be effective calculating when to execute the split step in order to make it effective. Also important is the split step technique, which includes greater forces on further foot from intended target and a pivot step to reach further and faster. Split step also developed greater forces. This may be explained by stretch reflex and elastic energy mechanisms (SSC). This study showed substantial pre-activation in some muscles before landing which is typically associated with reflex potentiation and stiffness regulation.

Non-Split Step: During this situation players leaned forward and dorsiflexed the foot, requiring greater anterior tibialis activation to enable ankle function. This preparatory movement is not as effective as the hop with split step. Although it seems a worse choice, in some occasions, split step can’t be used due to lack of time and/or improper timing. In these cases, it’s interesting that players have a well-developed strength base in anterior tibialis and vastus lateralis, muscles in charge and more involved in force production in these situations.

In conclusion, split step is faster and more effective if performed with proper timing. It generates more force due to the SSC and relies on its performance. Ankle function seems to have the greatest importance with split step. Now we can offer some practical applications based on information that we’ve been able to extract from the study review such as enhancing ankle function, strength on specific muscles, split step technique or SSC workout. When training athletes to move better it is important to work on Anterior tibialis strength, ankle range of motion to allow for more pronounced ground contacts.
 
References:
Nieminen et al. Effects of neuromuscular function and split step on reaction speed in the simulated tennis response. European Journal of Sports Science, 2014. Vol. 14, No. 4, 318-326.

Backhand groundstrokes are gaining importance in modern tennis. 20 or 30 years ago, many players had weaker backhands than forehands. In the modern game it is very difficult - some may argue impossible - to play at the highest levels without a strong backhand. While studies and investigations have focused more on the serve and the forehand, the backhand is becoming one of the big changes in tennis over the past few decades. The one-handed backhand was almost the only option before the 1980’s, but nowadays some of the best players in junior, collegiate and professional tennis can master the two-handed backhand without losing tactical versatility. Many coaches only teach the two handed backhand as they feel it provides an advantage over a one handed backhand. This implies the need for coaches to understand the differences and performance factors of these two actions.

To prove the importance of the backhand, studies have compared factors such as ball velocity or accuracy compared to forehand results. Part of the literature doesn’t find any differences while other papers do find higher accuracy or speed with the forehand. Investigations must go further and try to study different levels and situations.

Focusing on the two variations of the backhand, literature is even more inconclusive showing few differences between one and other options. This suggests coaches shouldn’t prejudice any choice regarding which stroke to use based on speed or accuracy. Kinematic differences between each backhand needs to be appreciated and put together in the context of each individual player and their needs.

If we divide the backhand stroke into its three common phases (Ryu et al. 1988) we find:
Preparation phase: displacement of the racket backward until the initial movement of reversing the direction forward. (Figure 1).

Acceleration phase: from the start of the racket forward displacement until the ball contact. (Figure 2).

Follow through phase: from the contact point with the ball until the end of the racket forward movement. (Figure 3).

Following this classification, every phase has its differences between the one-handed backhand and the two-handed backhand.

Concepts offered above can be used as a guide to help with correct technique – whether the athlete uses a one or two handed backhand. Bad execution of strokes is a major reason for many injuries. Different kinematic patterns we’ve seen offer different injury profiles which we will go over next.

As the one handed backhand relies more on upper-body rotation instead of trunk, injuries are many times seen in elbow and wrist related problems. A correct transfer of the momentum from proximal to distal segments (from trunk to hand) is essential in preventing these problems, as well as a specific strengthening program for wrist extensors and pronator teres. Adequate grip size selection based on age and hand size can also help.

Regarding the two-handed backhand, the direction of the foot relative to the net when playing a closed stance can influence the risk of ankle inversion sprain and heightens the stress on the knee. The authors of this one review recommend placement of the foot approximately 45º angle relative to the baseline to facilitate body rotation and decrease stress on the hip, knee and ankle joints. Strengthening programs specifically for these areas could also help and prevent injuries.
In conclusion, backhand selection shouldn’t be conditioned by differences in velocity, speed or ball accuracy, but based on kinematic factors, coordinative abilities and general skills of the player. Knowledge of correct execution and specific movement patterns and strokes help to limit injuries and will allow for more effective prevention programs and preparation workouts.

References:
Genevois, C. Reid, M. Rogowski, I. Crespo, M. Performance Factors Related to the Different Tennis Backhand Groundstrokes: A Review. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. (2015). 14, 194-202.

by Dominic King, CTPS, MTPS, ASCC, PES

I love to look around at many different sports and consider the transferable qualities that each sport can bring to tennis and how we can improve our training as a result. I believe that if you stay within the confines of a single sport, it is easy to get 'blinkered' and miss loads of great information that is out there and can be used. As a coach or S&C coach, to develop both ourselves and the players we work with, it is vital to learn from wherever we can.

An area I’ve liked to look towards is that of combat sports. I have always considered tennis to have many similarities to combat sports, both in terms of its ‘gladiatorial’ nature of being a battle most often fought 1 on 1, and also due to the fact that the tennis player must ‘strike’, though obviously in their case, a ball rather than someone else! As a result, looking at articles/literature related to combat sports is something I’ve always liked to do.

One such article I came across was, ‘Assessment and Contributors of Punching Forces in Combat Sport Athletes: Implications for Strength and Conditioning’, Seth Lenetsky, Nigel Harris, Matt Brughelli.
NSCA Strength & Conditioning Journal (Vol 35, Number 2)

The article looked to explore potential S&C strategies to improve punching force and so I thought if we substitute ‘ball strike’ for ‘punching force’, it may be possible to get a few ideas that could relate to tennis.

3 primary contributors to punching force were identified:

1) contribution of arm musculature
2) rotation of the trunk
3) drive off the ground by the legs.

I’d say that the above would correspond very closely with contributors to tennis strokes, perhaps groundstrokes especially.
The article wanted to look primarily at the research relating to lower limb involvement in punching. It is however important to consider the other contributors too.

It presented a couple of key points for me:

- In one study (Filimonov at al), of 120 boxers analysed, boxers with more experience/elite level had a greater contribution from their legs to the punch when compared with the other contributors (arms and trunk)
- A further study (Smith at al) concluded that elite boxers produced a greater punching force.
Together, the above studies would suggest that the greater the contribution from the legs, the greater the force.

Fighting Style vs Playing Style

Interestingly, Filimonov broke this down further into fighting styles and concluded that ‘knockout artists’ had a higher leg drive contribution than ‘players’ or ‘speedsters’. I would suggest there could be a certain carry-over into relative playing styles in tennis.... would it perhaps stand to reason that the Aggressive Baseliner for example would display a greater contribution from the legs in the shot than a Counterpuncher might....?

The article also makes note of studies relating to other sports, such as shot-put, javelin, even overhead throwing in children, which also support the conclusions of Filimonov regarding the importance of leg drive. The image below, taken from the ITPA CTPS workbook, ties in the concept nicely regarding the kinetic chain and the importance of the legs in order to generate force up the chain, ultimately ending with the racket.

There are many places we could go with this information, using it to inform S&C interventions to develop any player at any level while simultaneously working to reduce the likelihood of injury (the greater the contribution from the legs, the less force will have to be generated from other parts in the chain, such as shoulder or wrist, which could otherwise leave them more susceptible to injury).

The information above may not necessarily be groundbreaking but it is good to have to back up what I am sure coaches and S&C coaches are looking to do anyway.

We will look to go into some of the implications for Strength and Conditioning work in subsequent posts!

Dom is Head of Athlete Development at Halton Tennis Centre in the UK.  He has been at Halton, working with players of all ages, ‘from the cradle to the tour’ (!) since 2007.

You can contact him at [email protected]

@DomJKing

www.maximiseathleticperformance.com

By Joshua Colomar, iTPA Intern

Caffeine has been shown effective as an ergogenic aid in other sports involving high intensity intermittent actions like soccer, rugby sevens and rugby. Its effectiveness has been related to a reduced perception of exhaustion among other mechanisms such as increasing total running distance, lower limbs power output and increased upper body muscle performance.
Frequently, elite junior tennis players have much pressure to accomplish great results at a short age apart from educational obligations and many training hours a week. Added to this, energy drinks constitute a big part of this population’s consumption and are popular in their inner circle. It’s important for parents and coaches to be aware of the effects of commercially available energy drinks on junior tennis players and their performance during competition.

Studies such as Gallo-Salazar et al. (2015) give us an idea of caffeine implications in tennis players’ performance. 3mg of caffeine per kg of body mass in the form of an energy drink and after 60min to allow its absorption results in increased hand grip force (4.2%) in both hands, in addition to a higher running pace at high intensity (being this considered 18km/h or more) and a larger number of sprints during the match. As a result of these performance parameters, simulated game shows a higher tendency in percentage of points won when serving having ingested caffeine in comparison to placebo. On the other hand, ball velocity wasn’t improved during serve.

This gives us a clear vision of a better performance in some determinant physical aspects we find in tennis. Caffeine could be a nutritional aid to increase some factors associated with tennis success as was confirmed for adult population in previous studies and sports.

Nonetheless, as we all know, the most popular way of caffeine consumption is coffee. This makes us wonder if ergogenic properties remain while consuming caffeine through its most popular form. Studies like Hodgson et al. (2013), give us some hints about this matter. Although it’s not specifically focused on tennis players, trials were performed on athletes comparing coffee consumption, decaffeinated coffee, placebo and caffeine alone. After testing parameters such as average power output and performance times, differences were shown between the placebo/decaffeinated drink and coffee/caffeine drink, showing no significant differences between the two last. This concludes that in certain sports and situations caffeine intake in the form of coffee can be as effective as its consumption in the form of a prepared drink. Studies should focus on specific tennis situations and variety of ages/levels to be completely sure about this matter.

However, tennis coaches, parents, strength and conditioning coaches and nutritionists should be aware of negative side effects these kinds of drinks could induce. Other studies have revealed that some athletes report nervousness and insomnia hours after caffeine consumption. It’s a valid nutritional strategy to increase certain physical performance but must be assessed responsibly. First of all and before considering ergogenic options it’s essential to have a hydration and nutrition routine and/or guide to avoid risks and injuries. The consumption of appropriate fluid volumes before, during and after tennis play is essential to maintain performance.

Following indications provided by Kovacs (2008) we find that tennis players can sweat more than 2.5 liters per hour of play and replace fluids slower during competition than practice. In warm environments electrolyte enhanced fluids should be consumed on a personalized schedule, but somewhere between 200mL - 440mLper changeover is usually required. Nevertheless, coaches, parents and scientists need to individualize protocols and establish a hydration strategy. 
 
References:
Gallo-Salazar et al. Enhancing Physical Performance in Elite Junior Tennis Players With a Caffeinated Energy Drink. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2015, 10, 305-310.
Kovacs, M. A review of fluid and hydration in competitive tennis. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2008, 3(4): 413-23.
Hodgson, A; Randell, R; Jeukendrup, A. (2013). The metabolic and performance effects of caffeine compared to coffee during endurance exercise. PLoS ONE 8(4) e59561. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059561
 

By Trevor McPherson, CTPS

As 2016 has fast approached and 2015 is already in our rearview mirror, it gives us a chance to reflect on what we want to accomplish this year as athletes. I cringe at using the word “resolution” as it has a stigma attached in the athletic community associated with jam-packed parking lots at the local gym for about …the first three weeks of the year. Having the unique opportunity of working with everyone from the weekend warrior to professionals, one may think that the two share very little in common. However, when it comes to goal setting in tennis there are similarities throughout. Here are three key things that every athlete may want to keep in mind when looking to build a routine this year.

1.      Get Assessed

Tennis players are so quickly to judge themselves on their performance on the court, but when it comes to the other major parts of the game: hydration, nutrition and physical preparedness, often times that falls to bottom of the priority list. A fitness assessment is a benchmark for any athlete not only to determine strengths and problem areas, but also set realistic goals. 2015 became the year of the wearable in all sports. From GPS tracking technology to heart rate monitoring these are all great tools to track day-to-day progress.

2.      Develop a proper warm-up

There are endless resources and videos about everyone creating the most efficient warm-up for the general athlete. How many times have we looked at the process and thought is this specifically working for me? Even worse than that is the amount of times I have seen high performance athletes do the bare minimum before going out on court right into point play. No matter what the level is, as athletes we have to take the time to find out what our needs are and more specifically target those areas before going out on court. Looking at the most common injuries in tennis is one great way to start. Narrowing the focus on those exercises and other common problem areas will at least give the athlete something to build from. Athletes should have a go-to warm-up that they have memorized or that is kept in their bag, but also what I like to call the “worst- case scenario” warm-up. This is the warm-up for those tournaments where you have to get ready in the parking lot, or are sitting around for that long rain delay without much notice of when play will resume. All will be effective tools in the long run for any athlete to possess if they want to take their game to the next level.

3.      Trust the process

Athletes just like the average public sometimes fall into the habit of looking for immediate success. The relationship between the tennis athlete and coach is often one of the most intense of any sport. This alludes to why it is no surprise that the turnover rate between players and coaches in the sport of tennis is so high. So what do we learn from this? For one, find the coach that understands your goals. Second, trust their craft and the time it takes for the body to adapt to certain changes. Lastly, it is toxic for athletes to compare themselves to others when everyone has been on a different journey for different lengths of time.

If we are to make resolutions, let this be the year that we are at least committing to be the best that we have ever been on and off the court.

 Adam Blicher, an iTPA certified member and the special recipient winner of the 2015 iTPA Paul Arber Young Coaches Award, has a great new tennis podcast. Here he interviews iTPA Executive Director Dr. Mark Kovacs on many aspects of sport science and tennis. Here are the show notes; some great information is shared.

Mark is the Michael Jordan of Sport Science & World Class at translating very complex science into applied information that coaches, players & parents can use.

In this episode you’ll get to know:

- How to conduct training sessions simulating match situations

- Why you should always look at groundstrokes & the serve from the ground up

- How you can learn from everyone if they meet 2 criteria

http://www.adamblicher.com/podcast/markkovacs/

“Unique internship opportunity to work with the International Tennis Performance Association (iTPA) in the area of Tennis Sport Science and Applied Research. This position is for a current student who has a passion for tennis specific science and is looking to make a career of working in the tennis and sport science industry. This internship will focus on developing evidence based content from the scientific literature and applying it to coaches, players, tennis federations, parents and tournament administrators. The information will cover the major areas of tennis sport science including: tennis physiology, tennis biomechanics, tennis nutrition, tennis pedagogy, tennis mental skills, tennis analytics, tennis strength & conditioning, tennis injury prevention and recovery among other areas.

This internship can be performed anywhere in the world and will require approximately 20 hours per week for a minimum of 12 weeks. Priority will be given to individuals who can receive University/College course credit. Exceptional English reading and writing skills are required.

Please click here for more details and how to apply.

Visit www.Xenecoretennis.com to shop!

By Dean Hollingworth, CTPS


It’s been a little over a month since I’ve come back home from the US Open. It took a bit of time to settle back into my routine and gather my thoughts on what was a great experience. Having gone over the month that I was on the road, at three different tournaments (Cincinnati, New Haven and New York), I found myself wanting to share my professional experience with others that have the goal of traveling with a tennis player. Training concepts remain consistent whether you are in your own stable home environment or on the road dealing with different gyms and surroundings each week. On the other hand, having the ability to deal with an always changing environment is where the challenge lies.

Here are three points that every strength coach should adapt to their training concepts and philosophies in order to succeed:

1.      Preparation: Like the famous quote says “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” -Benjamin Franklin. This is true at any level of coaching, whether on the road or not, but becomes increasingly more important at the higher levels of athletics. Do not expect to be successful if you plan on showing up and figuring out what to do within minutes of a training session. Elite athletes need to be precisely challenged for positive changes to occur. A plan must be set forth with goals and objectives that you, the coaches and the player have gone over. Without this path in front of you, the likelihood of spinning your wheels in one spot is inevitable. This means having a long-term plan with short and long-term goals. Weekly and daily planning is crucial. Being prepared for every training session is necessary in order to focus on the athlete and not guess at what you are going to do next. A good athlete is capable of seeing who is and who isn’t prepared. This preparation will give you and the athlete confidence in the training.

2.      Be flexible: So with all this discussion of preparation, now you have to be able to adjust on the fly. One of the challenges is that with every city comes new surroundings. Mostly it has to do with adjusting to the gym that you will have access to for training. This includes the warm-up, fitness training and recovery work. Each site will present you with different problems including space, crowdedness and lack of equipment. It’s great that it is supposed to be a box jump day, but what if there are no boxes, or a leg training day and the heaviest dumbbell is 25lbs. This is where preparing ahead and being malleable is crucial. This can be achieved by trying to find facilities to suit your training or by being creative and challenging the athlete in other ways to obtain the desired results. What also helps is bringing your own equipment (tubing, TRX, cones, ladder, recovery tools, etc.) to help out in difficult situations. It’s about making the best of a situation that is not optimal.

3.      It’s all about the detail: To me, attention to detail is what separates good coaches from great ones and good athletes from great ones. Yes, the planning should be very detailed, but I see detail in another light, detail to the athlete’s training and surroundings. When in a gym setting with your athlete, the gym is your office. When in your office, the person you are with should get all the attention. Focus should be on the athlete and not others around you. No detail is too small not to realign or correct. Other details to be taken into account are the sport specific needs of the athlete. This can be hydration, food consumption, appropriate rest and recovery needs. Understanding their individual differences, rituals or quirks assist in helping them achieve optimal performance. The difference that separates a lot of these athletes is often extremely small. In order to make up that difference, the details should be focused on and adjusted for success.

This was my third time traveling with a player and of course it was easier than the first. Like it is often said, “if I knew now what I knew then,” well now you do. Incorporate these tips and let them help you become the best coach possible. In the end everyone wins.